I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.

I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Is this what you really think? So, what you are saying is that Nikon should have waited until it they had the technology/parts/whatever to release the D800 in the guise that they are about to deliver it in now? In other words, wait 2 years to release the soon to be released refresh of the D800 after the official release in March 2012. So, if we take that to the nth degree, we would never see the release of any new models as the new model would be the one "we should have had all along" and therefore waited until it was released. But then, that new model would be defficient somehow and the updated version should have been the one that they released and so on ad infinitum.

I think you'll find that manufacturers release stuff in oder to get the jump on the market. Yes, maybe they release it earlier than they should, but they need to make sure that they have the upper hand and release it with the parts/technology that they have available at the time. I see no real problem with releasing a product that does what is intended, seems to fit the consumer requirement, but then the manufacturer releasing a tweaked version halfway through it's product cycle in order to regenerate buyer interest and demand. Also this refresh may address some issues that the original model may have had and that the buying public has requested.

This is called marketing and long term viability and I see no problem with that. The D800/E is a fantastic camera and one that is great as is. Yes, it could do with some improvements, but as the camera is now it probably serves 90% of it's owners with more than they will ever need. Do I need a tweaked D800E? Probably not. Will I buy the tweaked version? Possibly if they improve the AF, high ISO, wrtie speed/frame rate. In isolation each of these tweaks is not really a reason to upgrade, but added together they improvements are a possible justification for "uograding" to the refreshed model. An improvement of the AF would be good and not that it is bad, but we can alays have better AF. If they imrove the high ISO, that will also interest me. If they improve the write speed/frame rate that would be good, not that I really need it.

The thing is, I can sell my current D800E for probably US$2,000 or so, and if the rumoured price is about $3,500 it has cost me less than $1,500 to upgrade for probably 18months shooting and about 30,000 actuations, depending on when the actual release date is. If it is a few months away, then it is about 18 months shooting with my current D800E. Pretty good cost in my books, only about $1,000 a year. I would hate to imagine how much that would have cost me in film and printing costs and the keeper rate would be much more than with film as I can shoot then tweak.

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.

I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Is this what you really think? So, what you are saying is that Nikon should have waited until it they had the technology/parts/whatever to release the D800 in the guise that they are about to deliver it in now?

No, I saying do their due diligence, not get slack on QC, and put out bodies such as the D600 and D800 as they should have been put out. There's no reason for the D800 AF to be worse than the D700 or D3S, but it is. So there's ABSOLUTELY no need for me to have to buy another body because Nikon no longer takes enough pride in their products to have it working properly when they sell it to me. I don't expect them to hold off new features until I'm ready; I also don't expect to have to buy a new body because they slapped a D800 together and didn't bother to test it. I've got snowmobiles to take that money. I'm fairly certain that no one at the faxtory ever rides one. Snowmobiles that is.

In other words, wait 2 years to release the soon to be released refresh of the D800 after the official release in March 2012. So, if we take that to the nth degree, we would never see the release of any new models as the new model would be the one "we should have had all along" and therefore waited until it was released. But then, that new model would be defficient somehow and the updated version should have been the one that they released and so on ad infinitum.

You may be getting a little foolish here

I think you'll find that manufacturers release stuff in oder to get the jump on the market. Yes, maybe they release it earlier than they should, but they need to make sure that they have the upper hand and release it with the parts/technology that they have available at the time. I see no real problem with releasing a product that does what is intended, seems to fit the consumer requirement, but then the manufacturer releasing a tweaked version halfway through it's product cycle in order to regenerate buyer interest and demand. Also this refresh may address some issues that the original model may have had and that the buying public has requested.

Agree with everything above except to fix issues they didn't have pride enough to build right the first time. I have no problem buying a new body to get new features, but not because they got sloppy the first time. As above, I have snowmobiles to take that money.

This is called marketing and long term viability and I see no problem with that. The D800/E is a fantastic camera and one that is great as is. Yes, it could do with some improvements, but as the camera is now it probably serves 90% of it's owners with more than they will ever need. Do I need a tweaked D800E? Probably not. Will I buy the tweaked version? Possibly if they improve the AF, high ISO, wrtie speed/frame rate. In isolation each of these tweaks is not really a reason to upgrade, but added together they improvements are a possible justification for "uograding" to the refreshed model. An improvement of the AF would be good and not that it is bad, but we can alays have better AF. If they imrove the high ISO, that will also interest me. If they improve the write speed/frame rate that would be good, not that I really need it.

The thing is, I can sell my current D800E for probably US$2,000 or so, and if the rumoured price is about $3,500 it has cost me less than $1,500 to upgrade for probably 18months shooting and about 30,000 actuations, depending on when the actual release date is. If it is a few months away, then it is about 18 months shooting with my current D800E. Pretty good cost in my books, only about $1,000 a year. I would hate to imagine how much that would have cost me in film and printing costs and the keeper rate would be much more than with film as I can shoot then tweak.

Hey, I bought a D4 just because my D800 AF was screwy. So I can spend a few bucks too. Just sayin', but shooting 30000 shots in 18 months is not photography. I could stick the camera out the window, put an intervalometer on it, and get good shots out of 30000 Try cutting that down to 3000, put a little more effort into it, and then you can be proud of it.

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.

I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Is this what you really think? So, what you are saying is that Nikon should have waited until it they had the technology/parts/whatever to release the D800 in the guise that they are about to deliver it in now?

No, I saying do their due diligence, not get slack on QC, and put out bodies such as the D600 and D800 as they should have been put out. There's no reason for the D800 AF to be worse than the D700 or D3S, but it is.

There are thoughts that the D700 was just as bad, just that we didn't see it due to less resolution

So there's ABSOLUTELY no need for me to have to buy another body because Nikon no longer takes enough pride in their products to have it working properly when they sell it to me. I don't expect them to hold off new features until I'm ready; I also don't expect to have to buy a new body because they slapped a D800 together and didn't bother to test it. I've got snowmobiles to take that money. I'm fairly certain that no one at the faxtory ever rides one. Snowmobiles that is.

You are assuming that the D800 is going to be released simply because of the so called left AF issue, which I am certain is not the case. The lastes D800/E's have not had the left AF issue, so there is no need to release a refresh just for that.

In other words, wait 2 years to release the soon to be released refresh of the D800 after the official release in March 2012. So, if we take that to the nth degree, we would never see the release of any new models as the new model would be the one "we should have had all along" and therefore waited until it was released. But then, that new model would be defficient somehow and the updated version should have been the one that they released and so on ad infinitum.

You may be getting a little foolish here

Not at all. See abpve.

I think you'll find that manufacturers release stuff in oder to get the jump on the market. Yes, maybe they release it earlier than they should, but they need to make sure that they have the upper hand and release it with the parts/technology that they have available at the time. I see no real problem with releasing a product that does what is intended, seems to fit the consumer requirement, but then the manufacturer releasing a tweaked version halfway through it's product cycle in order to regenerate buyer interest and demand. Also this refresh may address some issues that the original model may have had and that the buying public has requested.

Agree with everything above except to fix issues they didn't have pride enough to build right the first time. I have no problem buying a new body to get new features, but not because they got sloppy the first time. As above, I have snowmobiles to take that money.

Again, the latest D800/E's, inclsuing mine, do not have the FA issue, so there is no need for a refresh to fix something that doesn't seem to be an issue. They are releasing a refresh according to some for better high ISO, yes better AF but that is not due to the left AF issue and possible higher frame rate/processor.

This is called marketing and long term viability and I see no problem with that. The D800/E is a fantastic camera and one that is great as is. Yes, it could do with some improvements, but as the camera is now it probably serves 90% of it's owners with more than they will ever need. Do I need a tweaked D800E? Probably not. Will I buy the tweaked version? Possibly if they improve the AF, high ISO, wrtie speed/frame rate. In isolation each of these tweaks is not really a reason to upgrade, but added together they improvements are a possible justification for "uograding" to the refreshed model. An improvement of the AF would be good and not that it is bad, but we can alays have better AF. If they imrove the high ISO, that will also interest me. If they improve the write speed/frame rate that would be good, not that I really need it.

The thing is, I can sell my current D800E for probably US$2,000 or so, and if the rumoured price is about $3,500 it has cost me less than $1,500 to upgrade for probably 18months shooting and about 30,000 actuations, depending on when the actual release date is. If it is a few months away, then it is about 18 months shooting with my current D800E. Pretty good cost in my books, only about $1,000 a year. I would hate to imagine how much that would have cost me in film and printing costs and the keeper rate would be much more than with film as I can shoot then tweak.

Hey, I bought a D4 just because my D800 AF was screwy. So I can spend a few bucks too. Just sayin', but shooting 30000 shots in 18 months is not photography. I could stick the camera out the window, put an intervalometer on it, and get good shots out of 30000 Try cutting that down to 3000, put a little more effort into it, and then you can be proud of it.

Now whos being foolish?

I shoot birds and have done a few trips OS, so shooting 30,000 shots is not out of the question.

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.

I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Is this what you really think? So, what you are saying is that Nikon should have waited until it they had the technology/parts/whatever to release the D800 in the guise that they are about to deliver it in now?

No, I saying do their due diligence, not get slack on QC, and put out bodies such as the D600 and D800 as they should have been put out. There's no reason for the D800 AF to be worse than the D700 or D3S, but it is.

There are thoughts that the D700 was just as bad, just that we didn't see it due to less resolution

I think those thoughts are wrong.

So there's ABSOLUTELY no need for me to have to buy another body because Nikon no longer takes enough pride in their products to have it working properly when they sell it to me. I don't expect them to hold off new features until I'm ready; I also don't expect to have to buy a new body because they slapped a D800 together and didn't bother to test it. I've got snowmobiles to take that money. I'm fairly certain that no one at the faxtory ever rides one. Snowmobiles that is.

You are assuming that the D800 is going to be released simply because of the so called left AF issue

No, definitely not. See below

, which I am certain is not the case. The lastes D800/E's have not had the left AF issue, so there is no need to release a refresh just for that.

No definitely not. I had what was probably one of the first D800s in Toronto. No left AF issue. My 800e has no left AF issue. So for me personally, the left AF issue never happened. And I have absolutely no problem with the release of an "s" model. I do however, firmly believe that the 800 AF ( overall ) is not what it should have been due to slackness on Nikon's part. And I would not feel good about having to buy one because they chose to be slack ass before, and now decide that they can put at least a D700 / D3S level AF in there. If they put in upgrades / new features that I felt were "must have" then I wouldn't mind spending the dollars for it. But I don't want to have to pay for the AF system I already paid for.

In other words, wait 2 years to release the soon to be released refresh of the D800 after the official release in March 2012. So, if we take that to the nth degree, we would never see the release of any new models as the new model would be the one "we should have had all along" and therefore waited until it was released. But then, that new model would be defficient somehow and the updated version should have been the one that they released and so on ad infinitum.

You may be getting a little foolish here

Not at all. See abpve.

I think you'll find that manufacturers release stuff in oder to get the jump on the market. Yes, maybe they release it earlier than they should, but they need to make sure that they have the upper hand and release it with the parts/technology that they have available at the time. I see no real problem with releasing a product that does what is intended, seems to fit the consumer requirement, but then the manufacturer releasing a tweaked version halfway through it's product cycle in order to regenerate buyer interest and demand. Also this refresh may address some issues that the original model may have had and that the buying public has requested.

Agree with everything above except to fix issues they didn't have pride enough to build right the first time. I have no problem buying a new body to get new features, but not because they got sloppy the first time. As above, I have snowmobiles to take that money.

Again, the latest D800/E's, inclsuing mine, do not have the FA issue, so there is no need for a refresh to fix something that doesn't seem to be an issue. They are releasing a refresh according to some for better high ISO, yes better AF but that is not due to the left AF issue and possible higher frame rate/processor.

This is called marketing and long term viability and I see no problem with that. The D800/E is a fantastic camera and one that is great as is. Yes, it could do with some improvements, but as the camera is now it probably serves 90% of it's owners with more than they will ever need. Do I need a tweaked D800E? Probably not. Will I buy the tweaked version? Possibly if they improve the AF, high ISO, wrtie speed/frame rate. In isolation each of these tweaks is not really a reason to upgrade, but added together they improvements are a possible justification for "uograding" to the refreshed model. An improvement of the AF would be good and not that it is bad, but we can alays have better AF. If they imrove the high ISO, that will also interest me. If they improve the write speed/frame rate that would be good, not that I really need it.

The thing is, I can sell my current D800E for probably US$2,000 or so, and if the rumoured price is about $3,500 it has cost me less than $1,500 to upgrade for probably 18months shooting and about 30,000 actuations, depending on when the actual release date is. If it is a few months away, then it is about 18 months shooting with my current D800E. Pretty good cost in my books, only about $1,000 a year. I would hate to imagine how much that would have cost me in film and printing costs and the keeper rate would be much more than with film as I can shoot then tweak.

Hey, I bought a D4 just because my D800 AF was screwy. So I can spend a few bucks too. Just sayin', but shooting 30000 shots in 18 months is not photography. I could stick the camera out the window, put an intervalometer on it, and get good shots out of 30000 Try cutting that down to 3000, put a little more effort into it, and then you can be proud of it.

Now whos being foolish?

I shoot birds and have done a few trips OS, so shooting 30,000 shots is not out of the question.

I don't know

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.

I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Is this what you really think? So, what you are saying is that Nikon should have waited until it they had the technology/parts/whatever to release the D800 in the guise that they are about to deliver it in now?

No, I saying do their due diligence, not get slack on QC, and put out bodies such as the D600 and D800 as they should have been put out. There's no reason for the D800 AF to be worse than the D700 or D3S, but it is.

There are thoughts that the D700 was just as bad, just that we didn't see it due to less resolution

I think those thoughts are wrong.

I'm not so sure. I have just checked a few of my 85mm f1.4G shots from my D700 and what I thought was ok, I have since been more critical and found that there was indeed what appears to be back focus. It isn't so prominent because the res of the D700 didn't show it up at normal view and wasn't until I zoomed in that I noticed that it wasn't as perfect as I had thought. It isn't a lens I used all that much on my D700 (or D800/E for that matter) and certainly rarely on the left AF points, so I didn't ever notice it until I did a recent critical look.

So there's ABSOLUTELY no need for me to have to buy another body because Nikon no longer takes enough pride in their products to have it working properly when they sell it to me. I don't expect them to hold off new features until I'm ready; I also don't expect to have to buy a new body because they slapped a D800 together and didn't bother to test it. I've got snowmobiles to take that money. I'm fairly certain that no one at the faxtory ever rides one. Snowmobiles that is.

You are assuming that the D800 is going to be released simply because of the so called left AF issue

No, definitely not. See below

, which I am certain is not the case. The lastes D800/E's have not had the left AF issue, so there is no need to release a refresh just for that.

No definitely not. I had what was probably one of the first D800s in Toronto. No left AF issue. My 800e has no left AF issue. So for me personally, the left AF issue never happened. And I have absolutely no problem with the release of an "s" model. I do however, firmly believe that the 800 AF ( overall ) is not what it should have been due to slackness on Nikon's part. And I would not feel good about having to buy one because they chose to be slack ass before, and now decide that they can put at least a D700 / D3S level AF in there. If they put in upgrades / new features that I felt were "must have" then I wouldn't mind spending the dollars for it. But I don't want to have to pay for the AF system I already paid for.

I don't see where you are coming from. I think the D800 is fine as I do not really find any real fault with it released as it was and is. I see no problem with an update or refresh either. They are reportedly releasing a refresh for better high ISO, better AF generally - which is just a logical progression of better AF not to fix any issue perceived or otherwise, faster frame rate/write speed and maybe more.

In other words, wait 2 years to release the soon to be released refresh of the D800 after the official release in March 2012. So, if we take that to the nth degree, we would never see the release of any new models as the new model would be the one "we should have had all along" and therefore waited until it was released. But then, that new model would be defficient somehow and the updated version should have been the one that they released and so on ad infinitum.

You may be getting a little foolish here

Not at all. See abpve.

I think you'll find that manufacturers release stuff in oder to get the jump on the market. Yes, maybe they release it earlier than they should, but they need to make sure that they have the upper hand and release it with the parts/technology that they have available at the time. I see no real problem with releasing a product that does what is intended, seems to fit the consumer requirement, but then the manufacturer releasing a tweaked version halfway through it's product cycle in order to regenerate buyer interest and demand. Also this refresh may address some issues that the original model may have had and that the buying public has requested.

Agree with everything above except to fix issues they didn't have pride enough to build right the first time. I have no problem buying a new body to get new features, but not because they got sloppy the first time. As above, I have snowmobiles to take that money.

Again, the latest D800/E's, inclsuing mine, do not have the FA issue, so there is no need for a refresh to fix something that doesn't seem to be an issue. They are releasing a refresh according to some for better high ISO, yes better AF but that is not due to the left AF issue and possible higher frame rate/processor.

This is called marketing and long term viability and I see no problem with that. The D800/E is a fantastic camera and one that is great as is. Yes, it could do with some improvements, but as the camera is now it probably serves 90% of it's owners with more than they will ever need. Do I need a tweaked D800E? Probably not. Will I buy the tweaked version? Possibly if they improve the AF, high ISO, wrtie speed/frame rate. In isolation each of these tweaks is not really a reason to upgrade, but added together they improvements are a possible justification for "uograding" to the refreshed model. An improvement of the AF would be good and not that it is bad, but we can alays have better AF. If they imrove the high ISO, that will also interest me. If they improve the write speed/frame rate that would be good, not that I really need it.

The thing is, I can sell my current D800E for probably US$2,000 or so, and if the rumoured price is about $3,500 it has cost me less than $1,500 to upgrade for probably 18months shooting and about 30,000 actuations, depending on when the actual release date is. If it is a few months away, then it is about 18 months shooting with my current D800E. Pretty good cost in my books, only about $1,000 a year. I would hate to imagine how much that would have cost me in film and printing costs and the keeper rate would be much more than with film as I can shoot then tweak.

Hey, I bought a D4 just because my D800 AF was screwy. So I can spend a few bucks too. Just sayin', but shooting 30000 shots in 18 months is not photography. I could stick the camera out the window, put an intervalometer on it, and get good shots out of 30000 Try cutting that down to 3000, put a little more effort into it, and then you can be proud of it.

Now whos being foolish?

I shoot birds and have done a few trips OS, so shooting 30,000 shots is not out of the question.

I don't know

Then why did you comment?

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.

I don't get all the fuss over these "refreshes". D4S behind glass in Vegas, then all the hype up to the offical announcement. Don't we know all this is coming? And that the update will be different from the current?? I'm in Toronto and we have snow. But I'm reasonably certain that sometime before July it'll all be gone. Same as all the cars will have some updates next fall. Same as new camera bodies get updated every so often.

And as I've said on here before, Nikon seems to have taken its cue from the snowmobile manufacturers. Build it one year; correct what it can the next. Last year Polaris's Rush was the cats ass, but for 2015 the chassis has "93% new parts" which means there's 7% in nuts, bolts and rivets. So Nikon needs "refreshes" to fix what they fooled up the last time. Too bad its come to that.

Is this what you really think? So, what you are saying is that Nikon should have waited until it they had the technology/parts/whatever to release the D800 in the guise that they are about to deliver it in now?

No, I saying do their due diligence, not get slack on QC, and put out bodies such as the D600 and D800 as they should have been put out. There's no reason for the D800 AF to be worse than the D700 or D3S, but it is.

There are thoughts that the D700 was just as bad, just that we didn't see it due to less resolution

I think those thoughts are wrong.

I'm not so sure. I have just checked a few of my 85mm f1.4G shots from my D700 and what I thought was ok, I have since been more critical and found that there was indeed what appears to be back focus. It isn't so prominent because the res of the D700 didn't show it up at normal view and wasn't until I zoomed in that I noticed that it wasn't as perfect as I had thought. It isn't a lens I used all that much on my D700 (or D800/E for that matter) and certainly rarely on the left AF points, so I didn't ever notice it until I did a recent critical look.

We have become more critical of our images since the D800. It might be simply that they weren't great then and on a second look now you realize it. Either way, not enough info to draw any conclusions.

So there's ABSOLUTELY no need for me to have to buy another body because Nikon no longer takes enough pride in their products to have it working properly when they sell it to me. I don't expect them to hold off new features until I'm ready; I also don't expect to have to buy a new body because they slapped a D800 together and didn't bother to test it. I've got snowmobiles to take that money. I'm fairly certain that no one at the faxtory ever rides one. Snowmobiles that is.

You are assuming that the D800 is going to be released simply because of the so called left AF issue

No, definitely not. See below

, which I am certain is not the case. The lastes D800/E's have not had the left AF issue, so there is no need to release a refresh just for that.

No definitely not. I had what was probably one of the first D800s in Toronto. No left AF issue. My 800e has no left AF issue. So for me personally, the left AF issue never happened. And I have absolutely no problem with the release of an "s" model. I do however, firmly believe that the 800 AF ( overall ) is not what it should have been due to slackness on Nikon's part. And I would not feel good about having to buy one because they chose to be slack ass before, and now decide that they can put at least a D700 / D3S level AF in there. If they put in upgrades / new features that I felt were "must have" then I wouldn't mind spending the dollars for it. But I don't want to have to pay for the AF system I already paid for.

I don't see where you are coming from. I think the D800 is fine as I do not really find any real fault with it released as it was and is. I see no problem with an update or refresh either. They are reportedly releasing a refresh for better high ISO, better AF generally - which is just a logical progression of better AF not to fix any issue perceived or otherwise, faster frame rate/write speed and maybe more.

I'll try it again. As new models come out, they leap frog older models. The AF of the D800 did not leap frog either the D700 or D3S. It's readily apparent on BIF. The D700, and particularly the D3S locked on easier, ans stayed locked on better than the D800. I was out shooting this past weekend. I went to a trade show, so as not to have too much expensive gear in the pickup, I took only a 24-85 non VR and the gripped D700 with Sigma 150-500. Later in the day I came across two bald eagles, the first I've seen in Ontario. After three or four shots in the tree they flew away. They were really too far from me but I wanted to see how it would do, focus wise. There was some light precipitation in the air, it was -10C, light was dull and the D700 locked on the one I followed focus on and most of the half dozen or so shots were in focus. That was with the eagle close to the ground, so half the VF was filled with white ( snow ) and the eagle was flying past a dark, treed background. The D800e would have been nothing but blurred images. Been there with it. And really the D4 AF blows the 800e away when it comes to BIF. As it should??, but the 800e should be closer.

In other words, wait 2 years to release the soon to be released refresh of the D800 after the official release in March 2012. So, if we take that to the nth degree, we would never see the release of any new models as the new model would be the one "we should have had all along" and therefore waited until it was released. But then, that new model would be defficient somehow and the updated version should have been the one that they released and so on ad infinitum.

You may be getting a little foolish here

Not at all. See abpve.

I think you'll find that manufacturers release stuff in oder to get the jump on the market. Yes, maybe they release it earlier than they should, but they need to make sure that they have the upper hand and release it with the parts/technology that they have available at the time. I see no real problem with releasing a product that does what is intended, seems to fit the consumer requirement, but then the manufacturer releasing a tweaked version halfway through it's product cycle in order to regenerate buyer interest and demand. Also this refresh may address some issues that the original model may have had and that the buying public has requested.

Agree with everything above except to fix issues they didn't have pride enough to build right the first time. I have no problem buying a new body to get new features, but not because they got sloppy the first time. As above, I have snowmobiles to take that money.

Again, the latest D800/E's, inclsuing mine, do not have the FA issue, so there is no need for a refresh to fix something that doesn't seem to be an issue. They are releasing a refresh according to some for better high ISO, yes better AF but that is not due to the left AF issue and possible higher frame rate/processor.

This is called marketing and long term viability and I see no problem with that. The D800/E is a fantastic camera and one that is great as is. Yes, it could do with some improvements, but as the camera is now it probably serves 90% of it's owners with more than they will ever need. Do I need a tweaked D800E? Probably not. Will I buy the tweaked version? Possibly if they improve the AF, high ISO, wrtie speed/frame rate. In isolation each of these tweaks is not really a reason to upgrade, but added together they improvements are a possible justification for "uograding" to the refreshed model. An improvement of the AF would be good and not that it is bad, but we can alays have better AF. If they imrove the high ISO, that will also interest me. If they improve the write speed/frame rate that would be good, not that I really need it.

The thing is, I can sell my current D800E for probably US$2,000 or so, and if the rumoured price is about $3,500 it has cost me less than $1,500 to upgrade for probably 18months shooting and about 30,000 actuations, depending on when the actual release date is. If it is a few months away, then it is about 18 months shooting with my current D800E. Pretty good cost in my books, only about $1,000 a year. I would hate to imagine how much that would have cost me in film and printing costs and the keeper rate would be much more than with film as I can shoot then tweak.

Hey, I bought a D4 just because my D800 AF was screwy. So I can spend a few bucks too. Just sayin', but shooting 30000 shots in 18 months is not photography. I could stick the camera out the window, put an intervalometer on it, and get good shots out of 30000 Try cutting that down to 3000, put a little more effort into it, and then you can be proud of it.

Now whos being foolish?

I shoot birds and have done a few trips OS, so shooting 30,000 shots is not out of the question.

I don't know

Then why did you comment?

"I don't know" as in still not sure it takes 30000 shots to get a few birds. But I'm only fri gging with you on this, so not important. What was this thread about anyway??

Anyway, put the new D4S AF in the update and I'd live with the rest. Even the D4 AF. The new processor should be good for a boost in fps by default. 6 or 7 would be nice, but AF alone is enough for me.